umount_directory

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that omitting 'path' removes all mounts, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention potential side effects like requiring the instance to be running or that it reverses a mount operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is highly concise: a single sentence for the purpose plus a bullet list for arguments. It is front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds value without repetition or fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema (which relieves the need to explain return values), the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, parameter behavior, and the critical nuance of 'path' omission. It is complete for the task.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides clear, meaningful explanations for both parameters: 'instance' as the target name, and 'path' with its optional nature and default behavior (removing all mounts). This fully clarifies parameter intent and usage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's action with a specific verb 'Unmount' and resource 'directory from a Multipass instance', distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'mount_directory'. The additional explanation of the path parameter clarifies the scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the sibling 'mount_directory' exists, the description does not mention it or provide contextual hints. The agent is left to infer usage without direction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.